Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

victor7 wrote:
this is more than Mig-29 for $29M

Mirage-2000 for $23M.

Multirole features can be made by adding range and changing engines etc.

More so because against their immediate adversaries Pak and China, they are sufficient currently so no need to buy $120M Rafaels or Eurofighters.

They need to add some solid backbone planes like Fulcrum, Mirage-2000s or F-16D etc.

victor7 wrote:Currently F22s cost is $350M per unit but when exports take place after 2015, then it may come down to $150 per plane.

Other than Russia, no other country can prevent F22 from being a devastating bomber to the military or economic facilities with no clue to the victim nation as to "what happened and from where".

victor7 wrote:Just did a goog on F22 export here is the link, not verified btw
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/06/airforce_tactical_061409/

Once Pakfa comes out and USAF sees it then they might go ahead with export version in order to reduce the unit cost and get some more for themselves.

Regarding Fulcrums, F16s, Mirage etc vrs LCA, The general idea was to buy already proven and practiced machines rather than spend billions in coming up with something which is barely like J-10 or early block F16s. Choice was not limited to the three only.

For a price of 1 Rafael, Indians could have gotten 3 very advanced quality jets from all around or even 2 Mig-35s with Aesa radars. Rafeal gives stealth, so what? How many stealths are needed to take out Chinese S-300s. I would have gone with two dozens at most.

F22 export model
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVMSgwa46S8

US export its best fighter for a few billion dollars when it can very easily make that money on F-35 sales anyway. I don't see the logic in that if you look from US point of view.

India has a chance to get a very good deal and it will much cheaper than 120 million that you keep stating, since it will be built in India.

I am sure Australia will love it.

But it is only for few seconds. After the doors are closed it will be back to its optimal condition.

In the context of the original question (Is Russia safe from F-22?), the 'available resources' are ample. So, IMHO, a F-22 or F-35 over Russia would be on a suicide mission if it ever launches any thing.

Time and again, USAF sources have said that F22 vrs 6 or so F15s is not even a fair fight. Many have termed Raptor as a 6th generation plane..........got to give some value to these statements. USAF does not like to boast and post wrong figures.

Save your air defense networks like Serbians did and prolong the 'hostile excursion' by the USAF.

ps: do not think any of the above, Iran, Pak or India have even S300s, so SAM question is out the window.

Simply put, said Pierre Sprey and James P. Stevenson, the F-22 Raptor is shaping up to be the Sturmvogel of the 21st century: a dazzling piece of technology that fatally ignores some of the unbending realities of aerial combat.

On surface, the Raptor debate ended six months ago. After years of controversy, the Air Force and Defense Department reached a final agreement on the Raptor program, with DoD and Congress approving full production of the stealth fighter while capping the program at 183 aircraft, a 50-percent reduction of the 381 planes that the service had long said it needed at a minimum.

(For Tyndall Air Force Base, where the Raptor pilot training program is located, this has meant a reduction in training squadrons from two to one, with 29 of the sleek fighters to be used in preparing pilots for combat units.)

But to Sprey, a founding member of the so-called “fighter mafia” group that during the 1960s and 1970s ramrodded the F-15, F-16 and A-10 programs into being despite fierce internal opposition, and military author Stevenson, who has written extensively on the Navy’s F/A-18 and A-12 fighters, the Air Force has created a major crisis in its future combat capability by sticking to the Raptor program.

The two analysts presented their stark findings to a symposium at the nonprofit Center for Defense Information on Friday in Washington, D.C. The two analysts provided their findings to The News Herald, and Sprey elaborated on the issues in a telephone interview.

Sprey said his briefing focused on the time-tested factors that define an effective fighter plane: (1) See the enemy first; (2) outnumber the enemy; (3) outmaneuver the enemy to fire, and (4) kill the enemy quickly.

“The Raptor is a horrible failure on almost every one of those criteria,” Sprey said.

The stellar attribute of the F-22 — its invisibility on enemy radar due to a computer-aided stealth design — is a “myth,” Sprey said. That is because in order to locate the enemy beyond visual range, the Raptor (like every other fighter) must turn on its own radar, immediately betraying its location.

Nor is the aircraft design effective simply because its advocates insist so, Sprey said. The 1980s-era F-117 stealth fighter was supposed to be invisible too, but post-Gulf War studies showed that the aircraft had been spotted by Iraq’s ground-based radars, he said.

And in the 77-day aerial campaign against Serbia in 1999, the adversary’s “1950s-era radar” managed to locate and shoot down two F-117s, Stevenson pointed out in his presentation. The situation is actually worse today, he said, because many nations have acquired advanced missiles that can home in on radar emissions.

“Who do you want in a dark alley?” Stevenson asked. “The cop with the flashlight, or the crook with a gun that fires light-homing bullets?”

Because the Raptor ultimately ballooned into a weapon that costs $361 million per copy, even Congress could not stomach the total program cost exceeding $65 billion, Sprey said. As a result, the Air Force is now committed to fielding a fighter program that lacks sufficient numbers to prevail in a major conflict, however effective the individual aircraft may be.

“Hitler had 70 Me-262s in combat,” Sprey said. “They were crushed by the force of 2,000 inferior P-51s that the United States had in the air.”

Early reports from mock deployments of the Raptor also show a major shortfall in the fighter’s sustainability in combat, Sprey said.

“The F-16 costs one-tenth of the F-22 and flies three times as often due to the issues of stealth, complexity and maintenance affecting the Raptor,” Sprey said. Sustainability and the number of aircraft available to fight on any given day, he added, are “vastly more important” than the quality of the F-22. “You have to have numerical superiority to win.”

On the last two points, maneuverability and capability for a “quick kill,” the two analysts assert that the Raptor is inferior to the F-16 and several allied fighter designs in the crucible of “energy-maneuverability.”

“Some (experts) assert that in the next air war,” all of the radars will be off and the air war will merge to air combat maneuvering,” Stevenson observed.

The Raptor’s performance in that mode will be “disastrous,” Sprey added.

“The only thing that will bail the U.S. Air Force out of this mess is the fact that they still have a lot of F-16s in service,” Sprey said, “The day they send the F-16s to the ‘boneyard’ is the day the service becomes a non-Air Force.”

To attack Iran would be pointless because it will create the very thing they fear... a unified and focussed Iran bent on creating a nuclear weapon.

The USAF that won WWII on its own in Europe with its strategic bombing campaign knows little of the truth.

I am nearly confident that F22 already has some secret technologies that its adversaries do not know about and thus not spend efforts in finding counter measures. Direct Energy, Blinding or Killing lasers, even mini EMPs can all be possible on F22 and F35s already.

Time and again, USAF sources have said that F22 vrs 6 or so F15s is not even a fair fight. Many have termed Raptor as a 6th generation plane..........got to give some value to these statements. USAF does not like to boast and post wrong figures.

do you find credible that one F-22 armed with six....SIX....AIM-120C (a missile that have proved in actual operations a PK of 0,46 against.... vastly outdated targets literally not employing any type of countermeasures and not attempting any manoeuvre to avoid them !!! ) can even only have one chance on 100 to win ?

F-22 raptor has been discontinued after just few years from its IOC...strange...VERY STRANGE , isn't ?

but was also tracked at very surprising long range by Thypoon.

victor7 wrote:

To attack Iran would be pointless because it will create the very thing they fear... a unified and focussed Iran bent on creating a nuclear weapon.

The attack on Iran has several goals. One major goal is the regime change in the Russia friendly nations. Second goal is to access the Central Asian energy sources via Iran and thus further reducing Russia's influence in the CIS. Many other goals can be listed, however final goal is Russia.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/05-04-2012/121003-missile_defense_retaliation-0/

Maximum range of R-73 is 40km, Maximum range of IRSTs is 60KM.......would not work well against F22s, IMHO. It will first burn off your radar from 200Km then from around 100 Kms it will fire AIM-120. Your IRST will find it at around 60 km giving giving you 50 odd seconds at most to evade.

For 25 years this stealth technology has been breathing down the necks of the adversary air forces and no solution yet reached to DeTacK it. Better focus on beating its missiles and bombs and also on increasing the range of IRST based identifiers.

Point has been repeatedly made that Russia has tools to handle stealth but if one by one Russia's friends are taken out then that is much more of a threat to the RF than F22s going on hunting missions against Russia's national interests.

victor7 wrote:Bro, in my reasoning a soldier a pilot or naval cadet is........not a cannon fodder from a poor family of some Russian village in Siberia.

Cant you say the same about US Forces. Where they are sent to Iraq on bunch of lies. They are a cannon fodder for corporate interests put forward as spreading democracy and freedom for Iraqis. What do you think?